Tag "Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez"

brainwaves Which phrase does a better job of grabbing people’s attention: “global warming” or “climate change”?
If you want to get people to care, try “climate crisis,” suggests new research from an advertising consulting agency in New York.
SPARK Neuro measures brain activity and sweaty palms to gauge people’s emotional reactions and attention to stimuli.
And now SPARK Neuro is turning its attention to climate change.
“Global warming” and “climate change” performed the worst of all in terms of emotional engagement and audience attention.
He pointed to the “estate tax,” which normal people didn’t care much about until Republicans started rebranding it as the “death tax” in the 1990s.
If a term doesn’t evoke a strong emotional response in the first place, it’s even more likely to wear out quickly, Gerrol said.
People who care about our warming planet are starting to realize the power of words.
The company’s work has been called a “lie detector on steroids.” For the messaging experiment, participants were first shown neutral stimuli to establish a baseline.
That kind of response leads people to pay more attention and encourages a sense of urgency, Gerrol said.

A. Ware / NurPhoto via Getty Images The party that won the most votes in Spain’s national election Sunday campaigned on a Green New Deal.
It will likely form a coalition government with the anti-austerity Unidas Podemos and smaller regional parties, The Guardian reported.
The PSOE gained control of Spain’s government in June 2017 when it ousted the PP via a no-confidence vote following a corruption scandal.
Party leader Pedro Sánchez called Sunday’s election in February after his party was unable to pass a 2019 budget with only 84 seats.
75.8 percent of the electorate turned out to vote, nearly 10 percentage points more than the number who turned out for the last election two years ago, and Sánchez interpreted the turnout as a rebuke to the far-right policies of his opponents. “We made it happen,” he told supporters, The Guardian reported. “We’ve sent out the message that we don’t want to regress or reverse.
Sánchez endorsed the idea of a Green New Deal, called “El New Deal Verde” or “El Green New Deal de España” in Spain, in January, according to The Intercept.
His party introduced a climate bill before the election that includes the following goals: Reducing greenhouse emissions to 90 percent of 1990 levels by 2050 Transitioning to renewable energy completely by the same date and getting 74 percent of energy from renewables by 2030 Divesting from and ending government subsidies for fossil fuels Banning the registration and sale of gas-burning vehicles by 2040 Spain’s Minister for Ecological Transition Teresa Ribera praised New York Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for emphasizing both the social and ecological benefits of fighting climate change.
Both sets of measures we were talking about before imply a program of mass public employment, the likes of which have never really been seen in Spain before.

Guest essay by Eric Worrall According to meteorologist and green activist Eric Holthaus, any minute now we’ll have the affordable magic batteries we need to make electric cars useful and renewable power reliable.
Batteries are key to clean energy — and they just got much cheaper Clean energy future might be closer than we previously thought
… In a little less than a year, the cost of lithium-ion batteries has fallen by 35 percent, according to a new Bloomberg New Energy Finance report.
Cheaper batteries mean we can store more solar and wind power even when the sun isn’t shining or wind isn’t blowing.
This is a major boost to renewables, helping them compete with fossil fuel-generated power, even without subsidies in some places, according to the report.
Massive solar-plus-storage projects are already being built in places like Florida and California to replace natural gas, and many more are on the way.
Now, more of that cheap power will be stored and passed on to consumers.
This could be the moment when renewable energy starts to shut down fossil fuel for good.
By Jim Steele Good news continues to accumulate regards corals’ ability to rapidly adjust to changing climates.
The view of coral resilience has been dominated by the narrative of a few scientists.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is one of those people.
Watch: She released this hilarious stream of quotes: “This is about American lives, and it should not be partisan.
Science should not be partisan…” … “We talk about cost.
We’re going to pay for this whether we pass a Green New Deal or not.
Her rant reminds me of the old Billy Joel song “Piano Man”.
…and the waitress is practicing politics….
But, this is what it really reminds me of: Move over wind farms.
Step aside acres of solar panels.
Carbon sequestration, as the process is called, removes CO2 from the atmosphere and… Guest essay by Eric Worrall According to CNN we should remember global warming also causes global cooling, and that any confusion is the fault of the Republicans.
Is it climate change or global warming?

However, when it comes to a safe climate, science and policy have operated in a vacuum.
The Green New Deal in Congress provides an opportunity for bringing both science and policy together in shaping a sustainable future for our nation that avoids a pending crisis to the planet’s life support systems if we do not act boldly and promptly.
“A great change in our stewardship of the earth and the life on it is required,” it stated, “if vast human misery is to be avoided.” Seven take-aways from the Green New Deal launch A second warning was issued in 2017 that the planet’s climate and natural systems were indeed worsening.
Aptly named a Green New Deal, it is as ambitious as president Roosevelt’s New Deal in the 1930s.
While there are gaps to be filled, by calling for carbon-free energy, clean air and clean water and an economic system that addresses inequalities, the proposal is the most comprehensive response yet to the scientists’ warnings.
It’s safe and easy to sign up.
Recent experience shows what can be accomplished in transforming the energy sector.
The energy sector’s carbon dioxide emissions dropped 28%, despite a rising population and a larger economy.
In sum, the Green New Deal is a means for leveraging these important outcomes.
William J. Ripple, PhD, distinguished professor of ecology, Oregon State University, was the lead author of the 2017 World Scientists’ Warning to Humanity: A Second Notice.

Should she try to make more of a publicly visible effort to live a climate-conscious lifestyle — like, say, committing to flying and driving less?
A. Dear IMHAH, I’m going to assume this question stems from the New York Post story that meticulously and gleefully catalogued the “gas-guzzling” habits of outspoken environmental advocate and Green New Deal co-parent Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: taking ubers over public transit, flights over trains, and, ah, not composting sweet potato peels.
And, of course, she wants to use political power to transform American society in a potentially remarkable way.
Although the Rupert Murdoch-owned Post seems pretty obsessed with bashing the young congresswoman, the driving question behind the article’s litany of eco-transgressions is a legitimate one that plagues American environmentalists every day: How does one live in such a wasteful, energy-intensive society without being a hypocrite?
Her introduction to environmentalism as a high school student focused on “behavior change as opposed to, say, learning about city council.” She says that lens obscured the fact that she was “living in a system created by political decisions made before [she] was even born.” But when you look closer, the line between individual actions and policy-level changes starts to blur.
If climate change is a driving value for you, an individual, shouldn’t you do everything that you personally can to limit your own carbon-footprint?
Shouldn’t you choose the emissions-reducing option, even if it’s unpleasant and inconvenient?
Gottlieb goes on to quote philosopher Marion Hourdequin: “A commitment to mitigating climate change should entail a commitment to being the kind of person who is thoughtful about her greenhouse gas emissions and makes an effort to reduce them.” Popula editor-in-chief Maria Bustillos wrote this weekend that “collective action doesn’t fall off a tree, it is made up of countless individual acts.” As for me, a person who has struggled with climate hypocrisy in my own life, I agree that any juxtaposition of individual versus collective action is false; it’s not an either-or decision.
The act of reducing one’s personal carbon footprint is complicated because it can be either a luxury or a sacrifice, depending on your personal circumstances or how you feel like framing it.
So, at long last, back to your question, IMHAH: Should Ocasio-Cortez commit to reducing her personal carbon footprint in a public way?

During a recent Q&A live-streamed on Instagram, apparently shot while she was pottering in her kitchen, the rising star of the Democratic party – and one of the few frontline politicians to get the scale of the environmental emergency – pulled no punches in telling viewers that unless we take urgent, radical action on emissions, there is no hope for the future.
“It is basically a scientific consensus that the lives of our children are going to be very difficult, and it does lead young people to have a legitimate question: is it OK to still have children?” With this one question put to her 2.5 million Instagram followers, Ocasio-Cortez has stumbled into a highly contentious area.
Population has long been a controversial factor in the climate change debate; one recent study said the most effective thing individuals can do to address the crisis was to have one less child.
However, critics insist we should focus instead on overconsumption, and that putting the onus on individuals to address climate change obscures the systematic nature of the crisis.
Crucially, they say, it lets the real culprits – fossil fuel corporations and successive global governments’ inaction – off the hook.
And even if you accept the premise that having fewer children will tackle climate change, there is also the thorny question of exactly who should be having fewer kids: an American is responsible for 40 times the emissions produced by a Bangladeshi, but often those who advocate population reduction focus on women in the developing world.
Ocasio-Cortez is not encouraging people stop having children.
And as the leading advocate of the Green New Deal plan – which aims to radically transform the US economy by 2030 – she is one of the few politicians to be working on a plan that might just offer a way to avoid the worst impacts of this crisis.
But perhaps she is raising a more profound issue.
Faced with a future of social and political breakdown, flooding, deadly heatwaves and food shortages – and a world full of politicians in various states of denial – why shouldn’t young people question whether bringing children in the world is a good idea?

formally unveiled Thursday outlines plans to cut global greenhouse gas emissions 40 to 60 percent from 2010 levels by 2030 and to reduce human-caused greenhouse gases to net zero by 2050.
In the lead-up to the unveiling, after months of calling for lawmakers to get on board, their plan received enthusiastic support from major candidates hoping to take down President Donald Trump in 2020.
Sens.
Cory Booker (D-N.Y.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)
Meanwhile, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), has had a more tempered response, emphasizing that there will be other resolutions on the table to consider.
“I welcome the Green New Deal and any other proposals,” she said.
“I’m pleased that House Committees began holding hearings on climate change this week, and I look forward to bringing legislation to the House Floor to reduce carbon pollution, help our communities prepare for current and future climate risks, and create clean energy jobs,” he told HuffPost in an email.
Among the chairs of climate-adjacent House panels, Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.) of the Natural Resources Committee is the only one to explicitly support the resolution, calling it “the right framework for the work we need to do, in Congress and across the nation, to reduce our fossil fuel use, create green jobs, and protect our country and our planet for the long term.” As for the Senate, none of the party’s leaders have given their support to the Green New Deal or replied to inquiries about it.
“I’m grateful for Senator Markey’s passion and strong voice on these issues,” he said in a statement Thursday.
I encourage members of our committee to examine the Green New Deal resolution and consider the ways in which we may be able to incorporate its ideas within our work this Congress.”

Glowing green The Green New Deal has been championed by advocates for getting the country running on purely renewable energy right away.
Some 600 environmental groups had demanded the initiative set out to ban not just fossil fuels, but also nuclear, biomass power, and large-scale hydroelectricity.
So when the resolution made its long-awaited debut on Thursday, it came as a surprise to some that the door was left open for nuclear power and even fossil fuels with carbon capture.
So just like that, the most aggressive climate policy proposal we’ve seen in years has the de facto backing of the Democratic party.
The non-binding resolution, unveiled by Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez from New York, and Senator Ed Markey from Massachusetts, calls for “clean, renewable, and zero-emission energy sources.” In wonk-speak, zero-emission is code for nuclear power or fossil fuels with carbon capture.
It’s unclear if we will be able to decommission every nuclear plant within 10 years, but the plan is to transition off of nuclear and all fossil fuels as soon as possible.” The factsheet disappeared from Ocasio-Cortez’s website on Thursday after the resolution was released.
Booker and Warren, for instance, have voted to fund research on advanced nuclear power.
The resolution calls on the US to meet “100% of power demand through clean, renewable, and zero-emissions energy sources.”
That includes “dramatically expanding … renewable power sources” but can also be read as inclusive of clean, CO2-free sources like nuclear & carbon capture — JesseJenkins (@JesseJenkins) February 7, 2019 The evidence overwhelmingly suggests that we will need to rely on a variety of energy sources to make deep cuts to carbon emissions.
Now, after voting for years to kill market-based climate policies, they’re getting a taste of just what they had feared.

About

Finding a single source of news on niche topics can be time consuming – until now. The ContentQube Network uses “smart” technology to curate content trending on social media and search based on keywords and categories. Our content discovery engine helps readers stay updated on the latest trends, and introduces them to new publishers daily. We are a referrer to some of the biggest names in the business.

Disclaimer: All the content aggregated is for informational purposes only. The content is owned by the third parties sourced within each article, unless otherwise noted. Attribution and links to the original source are included in each article. OneQube is not responsible for the accuracy of the aforementioned content. If you are the publisher of any of this content and are not interested in the referral traffic, contact us and we will remove the article within 24 hours.